Foreign To This World

Pages

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

So
often we forget that the Gospel's foundation is relationship. Even if we understand that fact, we go
about our relating in such a righteous manner that the entire purpose of
interaction is lost.

The foundation to relationship is understanding and
accepting the other person. When you make friends, you do not brush people off,
telling them to come back to you once they attain perfection. Instead, you
interact with them at their level; knowing them is your highest goal. Only once
you have relational trust can you begin
to work through the personal flaws, yours especially.

We cannot continue to disown souls merely
because they fail to agree with us.

We need to realize that friendship is not
an endorsement of that person's mistakes [nor is their friendship a
conciliation to your shortcomings either], but it is instead the first step in
beginning to pour out love upon someone. Love is patient, love is kind, love
keeps no record of wrongs.

When
we throw out the cliché that Christ was "counter-culture," and so we
must be the same, I believe we forget what culture he was counter to. Christ
did not come to be religiously conceited, joining the religious leaders in
their holy, pontificating disapproval, shunning
the lowlifes who pursued their own lifestyles. It was these lowlifes
that Christ made his friends and eventually followers and closest
disciples. Never once did he endorse
their mistakes nor approve of their misguided living, yet he stoutly defended
them from the religious and social furor so often directed at "the
sinners." What an example of love we
miss in the actions of Christ! In the end, it was nothing he ordered
them to do or convicted them of that persuaded them of his offered salvation -
it was instead his constant service and willingness to sacrifice that brought
them to his side. No man hath greater love than this that he lay down his life
for his friends.

His friends were the least of these.

So
what am I driving at? My question is, why we are more likely to invite someone
from a bar to church than to let an open homosexual in at the door? Where do we
derive the right to befriend or maintain fellowship with someone who cheated on
their spouse or involved with pornography, yet deny a gay or lesbian any
semblance of relationship? What have we
done to attempt to find common ground with those whom with we disagree? Or have
we forgotten that those faces belong to
people too?

We
seem to have this notion that loving a person requires overlooking their wrong.
And so, homosexuality and other sins remain unlovable because they appear so
offensive. But loving a person is more than ignoring their flaws; it is
accepting a person despite them. If we are to even approach culture, we must
live with this sort of love.

We cannot hope to persuade the world otherwise
unless the world trusts us first. As it stands, the Church is not seen as
trustworthy. Instead, it is viewed as a homophobic, anti-progressive,
conservative base rife with stereotypes and fried chicken. Is this what is true? Yes, we differ from popular opinion and disagree
with much of secular thought; however, we have allowed our disagreements to widen
the already existing rift between the Church and the Culture. We have forgotten
that a similar rift - the eternal separation between God and humanity - was bridged through the love of one man, Christ. Let us minister with that self-same love and
bridge this modern, ever widening gap. Let us offer more to culture than a
repeated condemnation. Let us work to find common ground upon which to build
relationships.

My
brother and I have had our disagreements over the years. I was more often than
not the overbearing, self-righteous firstborn, burdened with the maintenance of
holiness and personal image. I saw him as the wayward sibling with whom I had
been tasked to bring back to the sheepfold. For every flaw he counted in me, I
would count twice as many in him, and remind him to boot. And so, we tolerated each other,
suspiciously watching the other's action, each convinced the other was wrong.
In all those years, we had little affect in our attempts to conform the other
to our standards.

The
day came however when I was to leave for college. We loved each other dearly,
brothers in battle, comrades in life to the last. Yet that same suspicion
remained. The separation of our lives for the next weeks effected a change
though. The suspicion passed away and
was replaced by an irrepressible sense of honor. That Christmas was the first
time we ever discussed life openly or considered the other's advice. We replaced what had been a begrudging
existence of disagreement with a grateful relationship of love. We loved each
other as equals who cared rather than as disapproving competition.

As I did for so many years, so we too as Christians have forgotten who our brothers really are, and we have forgotten how to love
them. When you look into the eyes of a stranger on the street, you look into
the eyes of your brother. When you gaze upon a crowd, you gaze upon a gathering
of brethren. When you pass by a searching soul, you pass by a soul kindred to
your own.

But do you seek to bring these
searching brothers an answer? Then you must first love. For without love, there is no
life to be given.

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

After dominating headlines for the last month, North Korea
has hinted that it may be willing to bring an end to its nuclear brinkmanship
and begin a new round of talks with the United States. Pyongyang issued a detailed
statement this past week outlining its terms for the dialogue, including
demands that the US cease its “nuclear war practice” and annual war games with
South Korea and rescind the stringent sanctions against North Korea’s economy.

“They should take measures of
retracting the U.N. Security Council’s ‘resolutions on sanctions’ cooked up
under absurd pretexts,” the Policy Department of the National Defense
Commission, North Korea’s highest governing body, said in a statement carried by
its official Korean Central News Agency. “They should give formal assurances
before the world that they would not stage again such nuclear war drills to
threaten or blackmail [the North].”

In response, a South Korean defense
ministry official requesting anonymity stated “The tensions should gradually
decrease from here, but we cannot lose ourselves to complacency. We do still
have to be prepared for any provocations.” Nevertheless, as US Secretary of
State, John Kerry, said during his recent visit to the peninsula, “...our
preference would be to get to talks.”

The only question remaining is what
will the talks focus on?

Diplomatic Disasters

World
diplomacy with North Korea has a long and troubled past, plagued by the fact
that US and international officials are completely unsure of the nation’s
political status. Forced to use a fuzzy interpretation of state propaganda and gathered
intelligence as a barometer, US diplomats have often missed key opportunities to
get through to either of the Kim Jong’s. In the past, the US mantra has been to
stop the North Korean nuclear program and to guarantee South Korea protection
should Northern threats be actualized. However, if the US enters this new set
of talks with the same mindset, the only item that will be guaranteed is a
continuation of the vicious cycle of threats and provocation.

Now
that North Korea has a nuclear weapon, as well as the ability to launch such
warheads globally coming in the near future, the US cannot afford to continue
to treat North Korea as a misbehaving child but instead must look upon them as
a viable threat. With that in mind, US diplomats need to recognize the fact
that the current diplomatic stance only makes Kim Jong Un feel more threatened than
reassured.

Ready for Reform

Were Kim Jong Un reassured, the
world might begin to see North Korea open up to more western thought and
technology. Kim Jong Un has discussed improving North Korea’s dying economy and
has hinted that the nation may move in the direction of reforms [however
slight]. This fact was evidenced by the recent visit of Google CEO Eric Schmidt
to Pyongyang, showing that Un may be ready to allow new development in North
Korea.

However,
Charles Armstrong, Director of Korean Research at Columbia University, believes
that any hope of change will be stifled by the current US approach to North
Korean relations. “The dilemma, though, is that North Korea can only embark on
serious reform from a condition of what it considers absolute security,” Armstrong
notes in an op-ed for CNN. “Unfortunately, the quest for security and the
desire for economic improvement have been in contradiction for some time. A
genuine opening could unleash political and social changes...while the path of
security through nuclear deterrence and missiles have led time and again to
confrontation and renewed isolation.”

The old
adage states “Do not attempt to reason with a fool. He will only drag you down
to his level and beat you over the head with his ignorance.” Call it
nationalistic, but North Korea has been foolhardy in its recent provocation of
the US. As history has shown, you cannot beat the ignorance of out of the
communist political system, but instead, you can speak a language that they do
understand: money. Only by providing
strong incentives instead of punishments, obtainable rewards instead of
sanctions, and deliberate reassurance instead of threats in kind, will the US
and the rest of the world slowly lure North Korea down the path of peace.

Sunday, April 28, 2013

For the
politicians on Capitol Hill, I have yet another issue to bring to the table. I
realize that you are extremely busy debating immigration and soundly arguing
over gun control, however, recent events beg your attention elsewhere. To my
fellow Americans, I recognize that we all struggle to meet our mortgage
payments, much less figure out how much in taxes we actually do owe the
government, but the time has come for us to recognize the newest threat to our
liberties and freedoms.

I have
been deeply saddened the last week, praying for the families of those killed
and maimed by the dual explosions at the Boston Marathon. I dearly hope that this atrocity will never
be forgotten and shall never be repeated. We must do our utmost to prevent such
a bombing from ever occurring in the future. Examining the sequence of events
that brought about the attack, it is clear what course of action we must take.

For the
sake of our liberties and our national security, I believe that legislation
must be passed to ban the use and sale of pressure cookers. It was these
everyday items that were used in the bombings, and had the terrorists been
unable to access the cookers, these attacks could have well been prevented. We must remove these tools of destruction from
our homes and from our society. There will always be groups opposed to such
legislation, but we cannot afford to let our political opinion stand in the way
of safety. At the very least, we must require extensive background checks for anyone
attempting to purchase a pressure cooker. Allowing a pressure cooker to fall
into the wrong hands will only have the same consequences as those in Boston. It
is our added civic duty to ensure that crazy aunt Matilda cannot unrestrictedly
use pressure cookers as well. Recognize
we have just as much a duty to protect that nation as the government.

In
addition to background checks, we must also work to limit the amount of
atmospheres pressure cookers can withstand. Currently, the average pressure
cooker allows the user to build the pressure up to dangerous levels, as
evidenced by the numerous pressure cooker accidents that have occurred in the
last decade. Were we to limit the amount of pressure per cooker, we will reduce
the potential devastation wreaked by accidental and purposeful explosions.

My
fellow countrymen, if I were the president and I knew this legislation would
save one life, I would pass it. If I knew it would save a hundred lives, I
would pass it. But simply knowing the
enormous danger that the unregulated use and purchase of pressure cookers poses
to our society’s safety is enough. We
cannot afford to live in the past where these so-called “useful” items are
freely accessible to anyone—if we are unsafe now, we may never have a future.

Let us all put our signatures to
this legislation and with our pressure protect the nation for our children.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

How is that midlife crisis treating you? Highschoolers--tired of school? Well, the good news is that there might be a way to escape from it all. The bad news? It will take the rest of your life.
Not-for-profit Netherlands organization, Mars One, sent out a casting call last Monday for any and all volunteers for a decades long trip to Mars. Participants will also star in the consequent reality tv show, "Stars on a Planet." Mars One is looking for truly anyone: no prior experience as an astronaut or a degree in science required. Simply make a video stating why you should be shipped to Mars, and send it in. Great stuff, right?
As of so far, the organization has received over 10,000 entries, from out of which the board of directors hopes to select 24 lucky [or unlucky depending how you see it] individuals. Mars One hopes to launch the first crew of four by 2023, with subsequent launches of four man teams every two years after.
Money could be a problem though. Sending stuff into space has never exactly been cheap, much less getting humanity to Mars. Director and co-founder Bas Landsorp says he hopes the $25 application fee will waive some of that cost, though he notes that there is still much more fundraising to do. The accounting department estimates that final costs will be upwards of $6 billion. [sounds great. I'll send in the billion I found in the gutter the other day.]
Props to private organizations [SpaceOne included] for showing explorative initiative.

Friday, March 29, 2013

"I'm sorry. How could you ever forgive me?"
Its a phrase that is always hard to say to a friend, and even harder to hear from one. Its a statement of complete remorse that painfully stitches up the wounds of a wrong.
Forgiveness.
Its tough to ask for and sometimes an enormous challenge to give to someone. We often hold on so tightly to our grudges against our siblings, against the world, stewing in the anger or frustration that we believe to be so righteous.

But let it go.

Oftentimes we focus so much on Easter Sunday, but we sometimes fail to recognize the magnitude of what happened today almost 2,000 years ago. See, today was the day that Christ died, the day that His blood poured out of His body satisfying God's demand for a righteous sacrifice for the sins of humanity. The price of man's sin had to be paid--and that price was death.
A death that Christ gave Himself to willingly.
Because of that death, the cost of every sin of the world--past, present, future--was fully paid. The ledgers of debt were cleared, the negative balance was erased. And every sin--past, present, and future--was forgiven.
This is a fact that we so often overlook--that everyone has been fully and completely forgiven. You don't have to belong to a megachurch; you don't have to sing in the choir; you don't have to be the perfect father, mother, or sibling; you don't have to have a clean record; you don't have to be straight.
It has all been forgiven.
When I step out my front door, I sometimes can't help but look at the world with a skeptical eye, writing it off in my mind as a total, decadent, twisted loss. I turn and look into the mirror of my circle of friends and family, and see us as so much better than the world, those very special few who have a message of righteousness and love to bestow to those we choose. But I forget that Christians all were forgiven just as much as the rest of the world. We've just chosen to recognize the fact. But the fact that we ignore was that Good Friday wasn't about creating elitists, but about destroying the barrier between us and God's love.
When Christ walked the earth, He didn't selectively pick and choose the righteous rulers to become His comrades; He spent His time and ate His meals with fishermen, with tax collectors, with prostitutes. His love was for the scum of society, the people that the righteous looked upon with repugnance. And when He died, He forgave them all. Even against the soldiers who provided His cruel and painful death, He refused to hold a grudge. "Father, forgive them."

I firmly believe that you cannot be a Christian if you do not accept Christ's love for you. I firmly believe that you cannot be a Christian and refuse to share Christ's love for the entire world. Yes, God is just; consequences will come for where we all have abandoned Christ in our lives; but we get hung up on proclaiming God's great wrath and justice and forget to explain that every single one of us has been forgiven. We can't selectively choose to discriminate against people just because their sins stand out more or smell worse than the sins of the person next to them. We cannot shut the doors to the Church simply because someone has tried to find love in drugs, alcohol, pornography, or homosexuality.
We so often urge unbelievers to not waste the gift of forgiveness that Christ's death provides, but I think it is often we who waste this gift by forgetting that every person is loved and is forgiven by Christ. We write the person off as a total loss, failing to see the forgiven soul under the sinful flesh.

Friends, do not forget the reason for Christ's sacrifice.

It is hard to forgive someone, yes. My brother? Its hard. Myself? Doubly hard. The world? The challenge of a lifetime.

But it all has been forgiven by Christ. Shall we do the same?

[You say let it go]

When you feel like you're damaged goods, broken by your past or by your life, remember: every fiber of your being is loved, and every wrong deed in your history was washed away by the crimson sacrifice of Christ today.

Thursday, February 28, 2013

A military
court in Belarus has sentenced one of its border guards to two years in prison
for failing to protect the country from an invasion by foreign teddy bears last
July.

No guys,
it’s not April yet.

The invading teddies parachuted
into the capital city of Minsk and other outlying areas, carrying placards
protesting Belarusian human rights abuses.

While initially a publicity
campaign carried out by a Swedish advertisement agency seeking to show
solidarity for pro-democracy groups, the stunt has morphed into an all-out
diplomatic war between Sweden and Belarus. In response to the plane drop,
Belarus withdrew its ambassador from Sweden, and president Alexander Lukashenko
issued a state memo declaring that any further “teddy-planes” would be shot
down.

And in the midst of all of this,
the border guard who failed to report the plane in a timely manner has become a
scapegoat.

Not So Cuddly

You may ask
yourself, what kind of nation would so blatantly show hate for teddy bears?
Unfortunately for the teddies, Belarus is a prime suspect. For the last few
years, Belarus has been ranked by Amnesty International as one of the most
dangerous nations with respect to human rights. As the CIA World Factbook
notes, Belarus “while a republic in name is in fact an authoritarian
dictatorship” ruthlessly ruled by Alexander Lukashenko.

In recent years, the regime’s human rights
violations have steadily increased, from the unwarranted arrest of more than
600 political activists and presidential candidates at a rally to strict
sanctions against Jewish and LBGT communities. The US State Department
classifies Belarus as a rogue nation, detailing the government as “a brutal,
authoritarian dictatorship that blatantly ignores human rights and fundamental
freedoms.”

Surprisingly, Belarus is often left
off the list as one of the most restrictive nations in the world. However,
these teddy bears may have just saved the day—bringing the plight of
Belarusians back into the spotlight.